USA: No Equality Before the Law

I have written already that an active struggle between D. Trump and the American Deep State was going on. And the Deep State is clearly losing.

«Deep State» is the whole state apparatus or bureaucracy of the state that does all the work of running the country, and a set of overt (laws) and unspoken rules (established morality) that guide government officials in their day-to-day work.

Mr. Trump wants to «totally obliterate the Deep State», and Deep State wants to at a minimum keep Mr. Trump out of the presidency and at a maximum make him be responsible for all of his criminal cases.

The last round of the bout seemed to be won by Deep State: a jury of 12 New Yorkers officially found Mr. Trump guilty on all 34 counts in the case of hush money paid to porn actress Stormy Daniels. Now on July 11, 2024, the court will determine the punishment for the former president, which can range from probation to 4 years in prison. Judging by the way the American justice is functioning I am sure that Mr. Trump will get off with probation.

Deep State is a part of the state and it’s degenerating, too.

On July 1, 2024, the US Supreme Court (being essentially part of the Deep State) gave to the Deep State a major blow in another Trump’s criminal case: it ruled that Mr. Trump has substantial immunity from prosecution for attempting to overturn the result of the 2020 presidential election. Thus, Mr. Trump’s Big Lie is actually justified and now he is allowed to lie more and complete his coup d'état, which failed on January 6, 2021, without fearing any special consequences for himself.

I'd like to remind you that on February 6, 2024 «a panel of three federal appeals court judges unanimously rejected Donald Trump’s claim that he was immune from prosecution on charges of plotting to subvert the results of the 2020 election because he was president at the time.»
The judges explained their decision: «… Former President Trump’s stance would collapse our system of separated powers by placing the president beyond the reach of all three branches,» i.e. they were talking about an attempt to de facto change the US Constitution and the principle of balance between the different branches of the US government.

The US Supreme Court ruled otherwise and made a great Independence Day gift for all American supporters of the Constitution and greatly puzzled US allies around the world. Legal experts say the US Supreme Court ruling pushes past most of the norms in effect among American allies, adding more concern about the reliability of US power.

How do other countries resolve their issues with the immunity of their rulers?

I found a great article of The New York Times on this topic and just will quote it shortly here:
- «A professor of law at Keio University in Tokyo Keigo Komamura says that the Supreme Court’s decision now gave the perception of an American president who can operate above the law. «… This may be rude to the US, but it is not that different from Xi Jinping in China. … The rule of law has become the rule of power.»

- «Though some give limited immunity to leaders while in office, Japan, South Korea, Australia and Great Britain — among the United States’ closest allies in the world — offer nothing like the sweeping protections the Supreme Court appears to have granted in its ruling this week.»

- «In South Korea, political leaders essentially have no legal protections from criminal prosecution once they are out of office — and the president is limited to a single term. Four of the past eight former presidents have been convicted and imprisoned after leaving office for corruption and other crimes they committed before and while they were in office.»

- «While in office, presidents of South Korea have immunity from criminal indictment except in cases of “insurrection or treason.” Such a clause was pointedly not included in the US Supreme Court’s decision, which ruled that former President Donald J. Trump is entitled to immunity from prosecution on charges that he tried to overturn the result of the 2020 presidential election.»

- «In Japan, the Constitution grants all members of… Japan’s Parliament immunity from arrest while in office, but not from criminal prosecution.»

- «In the United Kingdom, where members of Parliament broadly enjoy legal protections from prosecution for political speech, they are not immune from the criminal laws that govern the public.»

- «In Malaysia, although executive immunity is not as sweeping as the U.S. Supreme Court just granted to presidents, a culture of impunity has meant that few leaders are taken to court despite widespread corruption.»

- «In Israel, all members of Parliament, including the prime minister, are subject to absolute immunity from prosecution of acts committed while performing their official duties. It is a protection not unlike that defined by the U.S. Supreme Court ruling. That has not prevented prosecutions. Although Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, was indicted on charges of bribery, fraud and breach of trust nearly five years ago, he has maneuvered tenaciously to stay in office. Before the war in Gaza, Mr. Netanyahu, whose corruption trial is ongoing, tried to expand his power over the country’s courts, triggering mass protests in Israel.»

- «Adam Shinar, a professor of law at Reichman University in Tel Aviv, said that the Supreme Court’s ruling basically introduced in the United States the same kind of immunity that Israeli leaders have had since 1951. But he said that American presidents have enjoyed de facto immunity for decades… «If we don’t trust our politicians to do good things anymore, then we need other things to step in, for example the criminal justice system.»

So what is the US criminal justice system and who are the judges?

A fish rots from the head.
I have very big concerns about the US Supreme Court. I dedicated a separate article to this at one time, which was called «Relationships, Justice and Сrisis of the US Justice Institution». Conclusion from this article is: the US courts are becoming a tool of political struggle and often make politically motivated decisions. This means that truth, justice and thus concord in the country are unachievable.
The most obvious concerns arise about Justice C. Thomas which has long been accepting expensive gifts from a major Republican donor H. Crow "not knowing that it needs to be declared." Justice C. Thomas has no moral right to be called a judge and keep participating in sessions of the Supreme Court. However, he does not think so.

There are also big concerns about the rest of the judges of the US Supreme Court, who do not impeach Judge Thomas after all his corruption scandals, and continue to work with him. Why? Apparently, because they could get (are already?) in the same situation.

But my main concern is about the American people. They see all these things thanks to a truly free press and do not react to them. Why? Apparently, because the Americans don’t care and/or have no desire for that. However, such a reluctance to defend the principle and spirit of justice can leave you without justice in your country and bring it to collapse afterwards as an unviable system without inner feedback loops.
The US Supreme Court’s decision gave the country a big push in this direction on July 1, 2024.

The American Themis constantly peeks from under the blindfold.

If the Law cannot punish Mr. Trump, then he is right. This opinion is formed among the people by the US Supreme Court’s decisions (or the lack of them).

Mr. Trump is very popular with a good half of the Americans for some reason (I think this is mainly a consequence of the poor performance of the Democrats) and so it is not surprising that the US Supreme Court majority voted 6 to 3 right along the partisan lines for his immunity. The Supreme Court is very helpful in returning Mr. Trump to the presidency. Maybe it’s for the better: the country will fall apart into groups of states faster and thus get out of stagnation.

Equality before the law in the US is a myth. The Americans believe in their myths.
Justice works selectively in America and it is highly dependent on the personalities of the defendants. Then this is injustice. I am sure that for any of Mr. Trump's 4 criminal cases, 99% of his compatriots would already be in prison. But... Mr. Trump correctly appointed three “his” judges to the Supreme Court. An excellent investment, probably the best of his entire life.

Justice and how it works in society.

Such a physically imperceptible substance as justice is the glue that holds any union or community together. Any relationship of any number of people (family, business, sports team, political party, state) is based on an adequate exchange of energy. The expenses (contributions like energy, time, skills, risk) of the members of the community must be adequately compensated by some income (money, benefits, amount of power, recognition) and then everything is good and calm in this community, it develops and there are no any revolutions.

In any country, justice is monitored by a separate branch of power - the judiciary, which can perform its functions in a better or worse way. The credibility of the US judiciary has steadily declined: last year only 25 percent of Americans said they had a lot of confidence in the court, down from 50 percent as recently as 2002, according to Gallup. The trend is obvious and the decision of the US Supreme Court on July 1 is the explanation why that happens.

I saw how courts of various levels made unfair decisions for money in Ukraine in the 2000s and citizens completely lost faith in the existence of justice in their country. Almost nothing has changed since then and now many Ukrainian citizens do not want to fight for Ukraine. They are confident that there will be no fair exchange of energy: the country requires from them efforts, time, energy, health and even life, but will forget about them immediately after their injury or death. These Ukrainians do not trust anyone because of the absence of justice in the country.


P.S. I allowed myself to predict in this article the future of the US Judiciary and, in particular, the fact that Judge Thomas will not resign after all his scandals and his colleagues will not impeach him, but people will not pay any attention to all that. And it turned out that I was right.
Now Judge C. Thomas and his colleagues went further and issued this “indulgence” for Mr. Trump...
How unpleasant it can be to be right...